ORDER

1. Special leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The only question involved in this matter is as to whether the High Court was right in holding that a Letters Patent Appeal will not lie against the judgment delivered by a learned Single Judge in a petition which was filed under both the Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

Having gone through the judgment of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench and having heard learned counsel for the parties, in our opinion, the question about the scope of Letters Patent Appeal under clause 15 has been clearly laid down by this Court in a judgment reported in Umaji Keshao Meshram v. Radhikabai1 wherein it was observed as follows at pages 837-38 Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 7341 of 1988 1 1986 Supp SCC 401 "Petitions are at times filed both under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The case of Had Vishnu Kamath v. SyedAhmad Ishaque2 before this Court was of such a type. Rule 18 provides that a where such petitions are filed against orders of the tribunals or authorities specified in Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of the Appellate Side Rules or against decrees or orders of courts specified in tha